The complainant Sham Sundar (here-in-after referred to as complainant) has filed this complaint U/s 12 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986, ( Now C.P. Act, 2019 here-in after referred to as 'Act') before this forum (Now Commission) against Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd & another (here-in-after referred to as opposite parties).
Briefly stated, the case of the complainant is that he is holding an electric NRS connection No. 3001552486 and is paying the bills and nothing is due against. It is alleged that it is the duty of the, opposite parties to install the correct meter and if there is any defect in the meter, the consumer is not bound to make the payment. The meter of the complainant was running very fast and consumption shown by the meter was very excessive and complainant challenged the meter in February 2019. On the advice of the JE the complainant paid the meter challenge fee on 28-2-2019. Thereafter the complainant got the bill of Rs.45884/- and he paid Rs.12000/- on 11-3-2019 out of Rs.45884/-. The JE told the complainant that there is jump of digit in the meter. Opposite party No.2 got a self declaration of complainant regarding checking of meter in ME Lab and meter was removed on 3-4-2019 but no notice was ever issued by the opposite No.2 to the complainant to come present in ME Lab for checking of the meter.
It is alleged that meter was never checked in the presence of the complainant nor he was called in ME Lab nor any report sent to the complainant whereas as per Commercial circular 22/99 it is duty of opposite party to send the meter within one month to ME Lab for checking purpose and it should be checked in presence of complainant but till date fate of the report is not known to the complainant. On the other hand opposite parties are forcing the complainant to make the payment of bill of Rs.45,884/-.
It is also alleged that even in the bill dated 26-2-2019 the Code has been shown "P" and consumption has been shown 5328 units which is totally illegal. The complainant met many times to opposite party No. 2 and requested them to solve the matter but they failed to give any response nor they rectified or quashed the alleged bill of Rs.45,884/-. Now complainant got a bill dated 7-11-2019 in which Rs.44,032/- has been shown as arrear whereas on 5-3-2019 there was a bill of Rs.45,884/- as shown due in the statement of account. The complainant alleged that bill dated 5-3-2019 is illegal, void, unconstitutional and against the rules of PowerCom and same is liable to be quashed. Due to adamant attitude of the opposite parties, the complainant has suffered mental tension and agony for which he claims compensation to the tune of Rs.20,000/-.
It is further alleged that previously this connection was installed in the name of Ravinder Nath, who is father of complainant and has since died from last 15 years. Thereafter the complainant is residing in the shop and is paying the bills so issued by the opposite parties.
On this backdrop of facts, the complainant has prayed for directions to the oposite parties to quash the bill dated 5-3-2019 and pay compensation to the tune of Rs.20,000/- and Rs. 5,000/- as litigation expenses in addition to any other additional or alternative relief.
Upon notice, opposite parties appeared through counsel and contested the complaint by filing written reply raising legal objections that the complainant has got no cause of action against the opposite parties. That the complainant has got no locus-standi to file the present complaint. That the complainant is not a consumer as the connection is not in the name of complainant, rather it is on the name of Ravinder Nath. The complainant has not come with clean hands and suppressed the material facts from this Commission. Before filing the complaint, the complainant should have approached the Dispute Settlement Committee.
It has been pleaded that M.E. report of the meter is absolutely correct and the opposite parties have issued the bill as per consumption of the meter and as per rules and regulations of PSPCL. The complainant did not deposit the bills, so the pending dues are added in the further bills. There is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties and the present complaint and story is totally wrong.
The other legal objections are that the complaint is not maintainable in the present form. The complaint is false, frivolous and vexatious to the knowledge of the complainant. The mix question of intricate law and facts are involved in the complainant which require detailed, comprehensive, elaborate oral and documentary evidence. which is not permissible under the present summary proceedings. The present complaint has been filed by the complainant only to injure the goodwill and reputation of opposite party and that the complainant is estopped from filling the present application by his own act, conduct commission, omission, negligence and acquiescence.
On merits, the opposite parties have reiterated their version as pleaded in legal objections and detailed above. In the end, the opposite parties prayed for dismissal of complaint.
In support of his complaint, the complainant has tendered into evidence his affidavit dated 9-12-2019 (Ex. C-1) and documents (Ex.C-2 to Ex.C-6).
In order to rebut the evidence of complainant, the opposite parties have tendered into evidence affidavit of Sh.Gurpreet Singh dated 30.1.2020 (Ex. OP-1/1) and documents (Ex.OP-1/2 to Ex.OP-1/5).
The learned counsel for the complainant has argued that electricity connection No. 3001552486 is installed in the name of complainant, who is using electricity from the said connection and paying bills. As such, complainant is consumer of the opposite parties. Complainant Challenged the meter being fast and deposited fee for the same on 28.2.2019. It is further argued that opposite party No.2 raised bill Ex.C-2 by way of which amount of Rs.45,884/- was demanded by the opposite parties. On inquiry, it was disclosed that vide checking in ME Lab, it was found that meter was running OK. However, it is further argued that checking was not carried out in the presence of the complainant. It is further argued by learned counsel for the complainant that vide letter No. 21 of 2022 issued vide memo No. 248/253/SV dated 3-8-2022, due amount standing recoverable from all the residential connections upto 31-12-2021 has been exempted by Government of Punjab and necessary instructions have already been issued to all the concerned officers of the opposite parties. Since the disputed bills also pertains to the period from 7-11-2019 to 25-10-2019 as such, the case of the complainant falls under the said letter of the Government and accordingly, opposite parties were required to comply with the same on their own.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the opposite parties has argued that meter was checked in M.E. Lab and it was found that meter was OK and accordingly, opposite parties have right to recover amount mentioned in the bill and there is no deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties and has prayed for dismissal of complaint.
In support of his submissions, learned counsel for the opposite parties has placed reliance on : 2012(2) Consumer Law Today 686 (NC); 2012 (1) CPJ 241 (NC); 2009 (4) CPJ 308 (NC) and 2013 (1) CLT 453 (NC).
We have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record.
It is admitted fact that electricity connection No. 3001552486 is installed in the residential premises of the complainant.
As per Section 2(7) (ii) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 :-
'Consumer' means any person who :
(ii) hires or avails of any service for a consideration which has been paid or promised or partly paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment and includes any beneficiary of such service other than the person who hires or avails of the services for consideration paid or promised, or partly paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment, when such services are availed of with the approval of the first mentioned person, but does not include a person who avails of such service for any commercial purpose.
Therefore, this Commission is of the view that since the complainant is using said connection, consuming electricity, being son of Ravinder Nath and paying bills and as such, complainant definitely falls under the definition of consumer being beneficiary and is fully competent to file the present complaint.
Now the question before this Commission is regarding checking of meter in M.E. Lab by the opposite parties in the absence of complainant. However, the opposite parties have not shown any law or any section of Electricity Supply Instruction Manual which authorize the opposite parties to carry out checking in M.E Lab by taking self declaration of the consumer to examine meter in his/her absence. Moreover, it has been pleaded by the complainant that Ex. C-2 was got signed by the complainant for checking purposes only, but not in his absence. As per Electricity Supply Instructions Manual, 2018, it was mandatory for the opposite parties to have issued notice to complainant before carrying out checking. The opposite parties have not been able to explain as to what was the observation of the said official at the time of removal of meter inspite of the fact that official removing the said meter was required to note down observations at the time of removal of the meter.
Accordingly, this Commission is of the view that since the meter of the complainant was checked in M.E. in his absence and at the time of removal of meter, it has not been shown as to which official of the opposite parties removed the meter and what were his observations. Even report of M.E. Lab has not been placed on record.
Therefore, this Commission is of the view that opposite parties have issued bills Ex.C-5 and Ex.C-6 to complainant without any valid reason and accordingly opposite parties having no authority to recover the alleged amount of Rs.44,032/- from the complainant. Hence, bill Ex.C-5 to the extent of Rs. 44,032/- is liable to be set aside. This Commission is further of the view that as per letter No. 21 of 2022 bearing memo No. 248/253/SV dated 3-8-2022, all the due bills of electricity in respect of domestic connections upto 31-12-2021 has been exempted by Government of Punjab and necessary instructions have been issued to the concerned officials of the opposite parties . Accordingly, bill Ex.C-5 to the extent of Rs.44,032/- regarding recovery of amount of Rs.44,032/- also falls in the said exemption and in view of the letter, it was obligatory on the part of the opposite parties to have exempted the complainant on their own without intervention of this Commission. Hence failure on the part of the opposite parties of not having complied with the instructions, also amounts to deficiency in service on the part of the opposite parties.
In view of the above discussions and evidence on record, this complaint is partly allowed in favour of the complainant and against the opposite parties and accordingly bill Ex-C-5 dated 7-11-2019 is quashed and set aside to the extent of Rs.44,032/-. Out of above said amount, the complainant has deposited Rs.12,000/- vide receipt dated 11-5-2019, as such opposite parties are directed to refund the amount of Rs.12,000/- to the complainant/or adjust the said amount of Rs. 12,000/- against future consumption bills of the complainant.
The compliance of this order be made by the opposite parties within 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
The complaint could not be decided within the statutory period due to heavy pendency of cases.
Copy of order be sent to the parties concerned free of cost and file be consigned to the record room.
Announced: (Lalit Mohan Dogra)
06-07-2023 President
(Shivdev Singh)
Member
